International Urogynecology consultation chapter 2 committee 3: the clinical evaluation of pelvic organ prolapse including investigations into associated morbidity/pelvic floor dysfunction

ConclusionsThe clinical pelvic examination remains the central tool for evaluation of POP and a system such as the POP-Q or S-POP should be used to describe and quantify. The value of investigation for urinary tract dysfunction was discussed and findings presented. The routine addition of GI radiographic or physiological testing is currently not recommended. There are no data on the role of the routine assessment of pain or sexual function, and this area needs more study. Imaging studies alone cannot replace clinical examination for the assessment of POP.
Source: International Urogynecology Journal - Category: OBGYN Source Type: research